Alka Lamba says DCW under Barkha Shukla completed proceedings quickly

AAP MLA, Alka Lamba, on Thursday, criticised the Delhi Commission for Women headed Swati Maliwal, who was appointed by her own government in Delhi.

News agency PTI quoted her as saying that the DCW under Barkha Singh (former Congress MLA) completed proceedings more quickly adding that she was disappointed that no FIR had been registered against the BJP MLA OP Sharma, who she accused of using improper language.

Lamba met Maliwal at the DCW office on Thursday afternoon. After her meeting with the DCW chief, she told reporters, ” I have been told that I can be arrested. OP Sharma used foul language against me… the DCW called me after three days today, that too for evidence. I have been told that the CD will be probed and it will take time. I have been again summoned on August 17. I am a woman MLA, I was attacked and then I am the one who is being summoned again and again. When Barkha Shukla was the DCW chief during the Congress government, proceedings were fast and summons issued on the same day.”

She said she had been asked to appear again on August 17, the same day the DCW has summoned the SHO, Kashmiri Gate and the DCP (north), who is investigating the complaints of attack on the AAP MLA from Chandni Chowk.

This was the second time Lamba had visited the office of DCW since being attacked in her head while leading an anti-drug campaign.

A DCW source said, ” First time Alka ji came here, it was to register her complaint. Today she was asked by the DCW to come. DCW will first ask the complainant to substantiate her allegations through proof and evidence. After that, if there is evidence substantiating the allegations, proper investigations will be carried out and actions taken.”

A case of trespassing, damage to property and preventing government servant from discharging his duty was registered against Lamba after the CCTV footage appeared to show her commit an act of vandalism at a shop.

No I didn’t say that @satyawanibondalpaty:disqus . One should certainly give a reply to the attacker instantly. But that is not the case here. In this case, attacker is one of the worker in that shop (not the cashier or owner), By vandalizing the shop she is not taking revenge from Attacker. Secondly, she had a Police officer with her when she entered the shop. There was no need for her to do it in front of police. I do want that attacker to be punished and investigate if owner supported him, but by taking law in her hands in front police, she has weakend her case. Sometimes you need to be practical and follow the process that law understands.
End of the day, she got hurt, got a FIR against her, might get arrested, BJP made fun of her, Media criticized her and noone is discussing about the attacker. Did that solved her purpose?